tritx: For all those MegaPixelManiacs:18 is the right number. 5.200 pixels horizontaly. That means about 42 cm at 300 dpi. Guess what: that's the size of a two spreadsheet of a magazine.The Pros (and of course Nikon) knows that for newspapers or even worse for the Internet, they do not need more than 12 or even less MP. As for the landscapers: Do you REALLY print anything bigger than A3+? If you do, then you allready know that Medium Format is the way. Right choice for Canon, for THAT kind of camera. And for THAT type of photographer. If they manage to have the big thing in IQ, they are in the right path.

Horses for courses. All I'm trying to say, is that maybe this camera is a turning point. We all know that we have more pixels and more detail that we ever imagine in film days (35 mm). At this point we need no more pixel, but BETTER pixels. So why dont we ask for a full frame sensor with mediuf format image quality?I'm a car photogrrapher for the last 20 years, I have all around my house any kind of equipment you can name, and the only thing i want at this point is a good file (wider DR, good color, etc) to play with. An of course a reliable AF system. Either Canon or Nikon (just the two of them, if you are in business for your life). Just a tool to get the job done. Nothing more, nothing less.

For all those MegaPixelManiacs:18 is the right number. 5.200 pixels horizontaly. That means about 42 cm at 300 dpi. Guess what: that's the size of a two spreadsheet of a magazine.The Pros (and of course Nikon) knows that for newspapers or even worse for the Internet, they do not need more than 12 or even less MP. As for the landscapers: Do you REALLY print anything bigger than A3+? If you do, then you allready know that Medium Format is the way. Right choice for Canon, for THAT kind of camera. And for THAT type of photographer. If they manage to have the big thing in IQ, they are in the right path.